Are scoop stretchers suitable for use on spine injured patients?

Are scoop stretchers suitable for use on spine-injured patients?

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

In the prehospital setting, spine-injured patients must be transferred to a spine board to immobilize the spine. This can be accomplished using both manual techniques and mechanical devices.

OBJECTIVES

The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the scoop stretcher to limit cervical spine motion as compared to 2 commonly used manual transfer techniques.

METHODS

Three-dimensional angular motion generated across the C5-C6 spinal segment during execution of 2 manual transfer techniques and the application of a scoop stretcher was recorded first on cadavers with intact spines and then repeated after C5-C6 destabilization. A 3-dimensional electromagnetic tracking device was used to measure the maximum angular and linear motion produced during all test sessions.

RESULTS

Although not statistically significant, the execution of the log roll maneuver created more motion in all directions than either the lift-and-slide technique or with scoop stretcher application. The scoop stretcher and lift-and-slide techniques were able to restrict motion to a comparable degree.

CONCLUSION

The effectiveness of the scoop stretcher to limit spinal motion in the destabilized spine is comparable or better than manual techniques currently being used by primary responders.

Links

Authors+Show Affiliations

Department of Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine, University of South Florida, Mail Code-MDC106 Tampa, FL 33612, USA.

No affiliation info available

No affiliation info available

No affiliation info available

MeSH

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study

Evaluation Study

Journal Article

Citation

Del Rossi, Gianluca, et al. "Are Scoop Stretchers Suitable for Use On Spine-injured Patients?" The American Journal of Emergency Medicine, vol. 28, no. 7, 2010, pp. 751-6.

Del Rossi G, Rechtine GR, Conrad BP, et al. Are scoop stretchers suitable for use on spine-injured patients? Am J Emerg Med. 2010;28(7):751-6.

Del Rossi, G., Rechtine, G. R., Conrad, B. P., & Horodyski, M. (2010). Are scoop stretchers suitable for use on spine-injured patients? The American Journal of Emergency Medicine, 28(7), 751-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajem.2009.03.014

Del Rossi G, et al. Are Scoop Stretchers Suitable for Use On Spine-injured Patients. Am J Emerg Med. 2010;28(7):751-6. PubMed PMID: 20837250.

TY - JOUR T1 - Are scoop stretchers suitable for use on spine-injured patients? AU - Del Rossi,Gianluca, AU - Rechtine,Glenn R, AU - Conrad,Bryan P, AU - Horodyski,Marybeth, Y1 - 2010/02/25/ PY - 2009/03/04/received PY - 2009/03/13/revised PY - 2009/03/14/accepted PY - 2010/9/15/entrez PY - 2010/9/15/pubmed PY - 2010/10/1/medline SP - 751 EP - 6 JF - The American journal of emergency medicine JO - Am J Emerg Med VL - 28 IS - 7 N2 - INTRODUCTION: In the prehospital setting, spine-injured patients must be transferred to a spine board to immobilize the spine. This can be accomplished using both manual techniques and mechanical devices. OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the scoop stretcher to limit cervical spine motion as compared to 2 commonly used manual transfer techniques. METHODS: Three-dimensional angular motion generated across the C5-C6 spinal segment during execution of 2 manual transfer techniques and the application of a scoop stretcher was recorded first on cadavers with intact spines and then repeated after C5-C6 destabilization. A 3-dimensional electromagnetic tracking device was used to measure the maximum angular and linear motion produced during all test sessions. RESULTS: Although not statistically significant, the execution of the log roll maneuver created more motion in all directions than either the lift-and-slide technique or with scoop stretcher application. The scoop stretcher and lift-and-slide techniques were able to restrict motion to a comparable degree. CONCLUSION: The effectiveness of the scoop stretcher to limit spinal motion in the destabilized spine is comparable or better than manual techniques currently being used by primary responders. SN - 1532-8171 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/20837250/Are_scoop_stretchers_suitable_for_use_on_spine-injured_patients L2 - https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0735-6757(09)00144-2 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -

by admin, on Oct 17, 2018 3:30:00 PM

Comparing the Ferno 65 EXL Scoop Stretcher to Traditional Extrication Boards

When conducting rescues and transporting patients it’s important to choose the right equipment for the job. Determining whether to use the traditional extrication board (previously known as the spineboard) or the Ferno 65EXL scoop stretcher in a given situation depends on the specific challenges of the situation along with an understanding of acceptable standards, as well as some personal preference on the part of the first responder. 

The Extrication Board

The extrication board, or spineboard, has been around for many years and been used by all types of responders – fire crews, search and rescue, ambulances, life guards, industrial rescue services, etc. 

In BC, paramedics only use extrication boards in situations that call specifically for extrication or if scoop stretchers are unavailable (i.e. on a rescue operation with out-of-date equipment or where other patients are using available scoop stretchers). The extrication board should be removed as soon as the patient is placed on a stretcher unless the patient requires full spinal immobilization.

The Ferno 65EXL scoop stretcher

In the majority of medical response situations the outdated extrication board has been replaced by the Ferno scoop stretcher. This stretcher isa straightforward, quick-use device that can slide under the patient with minimal movement.

The scoop stretcher is primarily used as a lifting device and is easy to remove once the patient is on the stretcher. It has recently been proven that in certain situations full spinal immobilization is more harmful than allowing a patient a range of motion, so recent Canadian C-Spine and Nexus regulations stipulate that unless a patient has deficits, numbness, an obvious spinal injury, has lost consciousness or has suffered a major distracting injury, they should not be kept on a spineboard or scoop stretcher any longer than necessary.  

Which one should I choose?

The Ferno scoop stretcher is more of a lifting device, while the extrication board is better for use where there may be stairs or narrow spaces (such as an industrial site). There are also practical differences in how the two devices are applied. The extrication board comes with the spider straps which must be unrolled on top of the patient and then secured, and rolling the patient onto the board can be uncomfortable depending on the extent or type of their injuries. On the Ferno scoop stretcher, straps and buckles remain attached and the scoop structure provides patient with more comfort throughout the process. Additionally, the scoop stretcher can be secured much quicker than the extrication board, and saving time can be critical when dealing with serious first aid injuries.

The scoop stretcher is the preferred device among BC paramedics for most situations. There is no need to roll the patient over, as the stretcher easily separates into two halves to scoop up the patient, and the process is generally much more streamlined than with the extrication board. However, in rescue situations the extrication board is the better choice as it holds the patient better as one unit, which allows rescuers to pivot the board sideways and upright through narrow spaces. Most importantly, when choosing between the extrication board and the Ferno 65 EXL scoop stretcher, rescuers should assess the specific needs of each situation and select their equipment accordingly.

Which type of stretcher is best suited for a casualty with a suspected spinal injury?

Does a scoop stretcher provide spinal immobilization?

What are the benefits of using a combi carrier over a scoop stretcher?